• My Family's Baby Nearly Saw Porn, WTF VERIZON?!?
    184 replies, posted
[QUOTE=Xolo;27721088]I don't think so[/QUOTE] If you're surprised about: "But why not view it at a developmental age like 10 when it's both more enjoyable and less confusing." Then you are clearly misunderstanding me.
[QUOTE=WarRocker32;27721047]Some parents don't want their children to see pornography at an early age because they want their child to at least be a bit older so they can understand the concept. At 5 they'll see it as, "Oh my, that gentleman's genitalia is in that woman's vagina, I will report to my peers at my Kindergarten class." At least when they're older they'll understand the concept a bit more.[/QUOTE] True. But sometimes parents don't take the proper precautions, and blocks aren't in order.
[QUOTE=Elecbullet;27721099]I'm asking what are the implications of a society which treats sex as just something that feels good, and are they good implications[/QUOTE] OK, but that's not even close to what you asked. By the way, those studies you linked don't say that viewing porn is the cause of people treating sex as something that merely feels good, they just say that people who treat sex that way are more likely to view porn.
[QUOTE=TheSpyV2;27721060]Yea WTF VERIZON for putting Playboy on a TV service that adults often use!![/QUOTE] On that subject I just realized that the OP was saying that it was bad to make pornography available to adults, when that's not what I agree with
[QUOTE=Xolo;27721088]If they don't understand it then what's the harm and why is it necessary to prevent it [editline]29th January 2011[/editline] I don't think so[/QUOTE] Children have a habit of recreating what they see on TV.
[QUOTE=Xolo;27721100]Not really[/QUOTE] . <--- My position on the issue O <--- Your head
[QUOTE=Billiam;27721058]But why not view it at a developmental age like 10 when it's both more enjoyable and less confusing.[/QUOTE] Because they could end up addicted. Just sitting in front of a screen looking at some sort of sick pornography.
[QUOTE=Xolo;27721130]OK, but that's not even close to what you asked. By the way, those studies you linked don't say that viewing porn is the cause of people treating sex as something that merely feels good, they just say that people who treat sex that way are more likely to view porn.[/QUOTE] You can't say either way. The studies say there is a correlation between the two. You can't say outright that porn causes the attitude, and you can't say outright that the attitude causes the porn.
OP you wern't even subscribed to the fucking channel. There is no way she could have seen anything. This is a stupid and pointless thread.
[QUOTE=3picFail;27721101]Completely irrelevant answer. He probably had a point to make with it.[/QUOTE] OK, I guess I could pose my points as ridiculous [url=http://ksuweb.kennesaw.edu/~shagin/logfal-pbc-eitheror.htm]either/or fallacies[/url], too. [editline]29th January 2011[/editline] [QUOTE=Elecbullet;27721152]You can't say either way. The studies say there is a correlation between the two. You can't say outright that porn causes the attitude, and you can't say outright that the attitude causes the porn.[/QUOTE] So if you realize that why would you present it as proof when it isn't proof
[QUOTE=TheSpyV2;27721060]Yea WTF VERIZON for putting Playboy on a TV service that adults often use!![/QUOTE] Cell phones are (primarily) for adults with the purpose of personal communication and business communication.
[QUOTE=Elecbullet;27721021]Do you believe that a woman who has had sex with a hundred men is no worse a partner for a long-term commitment than one who has had sex zero or only a few times?[/QUOTE] The woman may seek a variety of sexual partners and may have trouble having sex with just one person all the time. However, you're promoting that everyone should be long term partners with tight sexual laws (innuendo). I don't give a shit if you want a long term or casual relationship, just don't force your choice on me, especially when my choice would have no impact on you. Well, except you'd have a smaller pool to pick from, but as would I. Also, it's not like everyone is interested in life long, isolated commitments, especially when you're young. Have you read Brave New World? Good book and I recommend it.
[QUOTE=Xolo;27721160]OK, I guess I could pose my points as ridiculous [url=http://ksuweb.kennesaw.edu/~shagin/logfal-pbc-eitheror.htm]either/or fallacies[/url], too. [editline]29th January 2011[/editline] So if you realize that why would you present it as proof when it isn't proof[/QUOTE] To call it proof is fallacious, I was not calling it proof, I was throwing it out for everyone's consideration, because it was something more available to everyone than three links that led to something nobody could read
[QUOTE=Elecbullet;27721262]To call it proof is fallacious, I was not calling it proof, I was throwing it out for everyone's consideration, because it was something more available to everyone than three links that led to something nobody could read[/QUOTE] You don't need to read the entire study, just read the abstract
[QUOTE=darcy010;27721155]OP you wern't even subscribed to the fucking channel. There is no way she could have seen anything. This is a stupid and pointless thread.[/QUOTE] I think it spurred a pretty good argument.
[QUOTE=Rubs10;27721232]The woman may seek a variety of sexual partners and may have trouble having sex with just one person all the time. However, you're promoting that everyone should be long term partners with tight sexual laws (innuendo). I don't give a shit if you want a long term or casual relationship, just don't force your choice on me, especially when my choice would have no impact on you. Well, except you'd have a smaller pool to pick from, but as would I. Have you read Brave New World? Good book and I recommend it.[/QUOTE] I have not, correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't it about a dystopic society where everyone gets everything they want, and they all have orgies in the street?
[QUOTE=Elecbullet;27721287]I have not, correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't it about a dystopic society where everyone gets everything they want, and they all have orgies in the street?[/QUOTE] no
well, okay then
[QUOTE=Elecbullet;27721287]I have not, correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't it about a dystopic society where everyone gets everything they want, and they all have orgies in the street?[/QUOTE] It's an exaggeration, but that's close to how their society works. Tell me how it's wrong.
[QUOTE=DAS-QPYN;27719665]Everyone's rating you dumb because you did the most responsible thing to do, which is out of the norm for the average FP member.[/QUOTE] I rated him dumb because he's acting immature and making a thread out of something that isn't a problem. You have to subscribe to those channels, which is quite a process, in order to actually be shown porn. My point is, there was no "almost saw porn", because unless the baby is capable of subscribing to the channel itself, it wouldn't of been shown anything. Which renders this thread completely pointless. And there was nothing interesting to be said.
[QUOTE=Scoooby;27721379]I rated him dumb because he's acting immature and making a thread out of something that isn't a problem. You have to subscribe to those channels, which is quite a process, in order to actually be shown porn. My point is, there was no "almost saw porn", because unless the baby is capable of subscribing to the channel itself, it wouldn't of been shown anything. Which renders this thread completely pointless. And there was nothing interesting to be said.[/QUOTE] It brings up a good discussion where people can present their ideas and have them criticized, then correct them if they so choose. I find it interesting, despite how stupid I am sometimes, or maybe all the time :v:.
[QUOTE=Rubs10;27721374]It's an exaggeration, but that's close to how their society works. Tell me how it's wrong.[/QUOTE] let me acquire a copy, read it, think it over, and get back to you on that I was under the impression though that it is a dystopia, written for the purpose of being a dystopia, meaning that the author didn't intend for anyone to point at it and say "Find something wrong with this."
[QUOTE=Rubs10;27721374]Tell me how it's wrong.[/QUOTE] If you have an orgy in the street you might get run over. :v:
[QUOTE=Billiam;27721420]If you have an orgy in the street you might get run over. :v:[/QUOTE] THIS IS EXACTLY WHAT I HAVE BEEN[url=http://caps] [/url] SAYING!
What a baby thinks when it sees tits: "Lunch!"
why do you call your 5 year old sister a baby? Baby means 3 years or less.
[QUOTE=Rubs10;27721415]It brings up a good discussion where people can present their ideas and have them criticized, then correct them if they so choose. I find it interesting, despite how stupid I am sometimes, or maybe all the time :v:.[/QUOTE] What the hell kind of ideas can you gather about porn on TV?
[QUOTE=commandhat;27719345]We're a Christian family. (well, christian-ish; I'm not christian myself, but why should a 5 year old see people having forced sex?) EDIT: Seriously, I don't know how it happened either. I think something else happened, but I dunno what.[/QUOTE] You act like they aren't paid, it's not forced sex at all.
[QUOTE=jaybuz;27721597]why do you call your 5 year old sister a baby? Baby means 3 years or less.[/QUOTE] Because she's the baby of the family. [url]http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/baby_of_the_family[/url]
My Family's Baby Nearly Saw Porn, WTF BREASTFEEDING?!?
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.